Posted on 07/01/2025 10:30:32 AM PDT by RandFan
@RandPaul
Throughout the Vote-a-rama, I was working all night to stop Congress from adding to our debt.
I met with @VP and I reiterated my offer to vote for the bill—if it included a 90% reduction in the debt ceiling.
No earmarks. No handouts. Just real fiscal reform.
I wasn’t looking for favors. I wasn’t horse-trading. I was fighting for the American people and against our out-of-control debt.
Bottom line: I offered my vote for fiscal sanity. Congress chose to sell out taxpayers instead. Only once the bill is released, we will know what the true price was.
(Excerpt) Read more at x.com ...
Anybody with half-a-brain, and even Rand Paul knew that the Big Beautiful Bill was not a Budget funding Bill. It's a reconciliation Bill that will make certain tax cuts permanent. Currently, development of the actual Fiscal Year 2026 spending Bill is taking place with Senate Appropriations Committees currently working on funding plans for all federal agencies. Any reduction to the funding of government agencies has to occur in Rescission Bills, which are specifically used to cancel funding previously approved by Congress. Rescission Bills allow Congress to rescind budget authority that federal agencies were previously given.
“I met with @VP and I reiterated my offer to vote for the bill—if it included a 90% reduction in the debt ceiling.”
If the administration had accepted his offer they would have lost 10 or 15 other votes; how would that have helped advance the bill?
I guess Rand didn’t think of that.
You know it’s bad when he has to explain himself on X. Rand was willing to let taxes skyrocket regardless of his reduction in the debt ceiling attempt. He still voted no.
And I want an Oompah Loompa NOW, Daddy!
He gives drama queens a bad name.
By holding out they had to give $$$ to RINOs. So drama queen helped to make deficit worse.
Congrats drama queen!
Of coursnot. It’s all about Rand, all the time.
Back when he was at Baylor, they called him AquaBuddha. Don’t ax how I know that.
Just sayin’...
So Rand wants to come back in 6 months on another bill to increase the debt ceiling and let the Dems hold us hostage to get it raised every time. $5 trillion gives Trump some breathing room and time for the tax cuts / tariffs / economic growth to work.
Thanks for these clear descriptions:
“Rand’s toast. A lone wolf, not a MAGA team player!”
“He’s turned into John McCain. Nobody else to blame but himself.”
“So Rand wants to come back in 6 months on another bill to increase the debt ceiling “
Last I heard it would be next month.
Why didn’t you get your other Senators to vote for it? Nobody likes the bill but you are not going to get anything out of the marble nuthouse that will.
Yes. It is a reconciliation bill, not a budget bill.
Much of the already approved spending is off-limits in a reconciliation bill.
Then wouldn’t they have to come back for a specific vote for that again later this year?
Wouldn’t all the preening and pork-barreling start all over again?
Murkowski’s pork provision was nixed by the parliamentarian last night. She got burned.
Oh she did, well that’s good..then how come Chip Roy was all up in arms about it this morning saying that something she wanted was put back in to ensure her vote
What with XXX demanding increased Government spending and the proposed next Federal budget already thrown out of balance by Congress, the prospects for approval of Congressman ABC's resolution for orderly retirement of the national debt do not seem very promising.I'll post the answer here later today. Post your best guess!But even in introducing the proposal the Representative has performed a public service, for he has reminded the American people of the tremendous weight of debt under which the National Government is attempting to operate and of the necessity of reducing it if ultimate bankruptcy is to be avoided.
Congressman ABC's proposal, despite the poor light in which his colleagues are likely to regard it, is eminently practical. It calls for retirement of the $285 billion debt over a period of 100 years at a rate of $2.8 billion a year.
Before other Members of the Congress dismiss the suggestion as politically undesirable and a poor substitute for vote-wheedling spending programs, they should reflect upon what the political situation may be if the debt continues to rise and repudiation becomes the only way out.
The fact that an entire century would be required under ABC's resolution to correct what war and governmental irresponsibility have brought about in a quarter of a century is a measure of the improvidence under which the national establishment has been operated.
A hundred years of paying back what is owed is a mighty long time, but we owe a mighty big debt, far beyond anything which any government ever owned before. The interest rate alone is costing the taxpayer more than $8 billion a year.
The debt would be serious enough if it had no other effect upon the economy than that of the requirement to pay the heavy interest charge. But its presence, and the constant fact of budgetary deficits in the effort to keep political wheels turning, has profoundly disturbed American economics. The debt is a supercharger of inflation, and inflation has so weakened the value of the U.S. dollar that it is worth less than half what it was worth 20 years ago.
Clearly no greater fallacy was ever uttered than that advanced when the great debt was in the early processes of creation, that it was of no moment because "we owe the money to ourselves." Debt is debt, whether it is public or private. The obligation has to be discharged sometime, in some manner-by honest repayment, by erosion of the people's savings through inflation, or by outright repudiation.
We are far from the last, but we are engaging in the second under political euphemisms, and we are dodging the first. To undertake the honest and orderly repayment of the debt would produce great economic benefits long before the debt itself were fully repaid. Confidence in Federal fiscal integrity would return in a short time and a powerful influence would be brought to bear against the inflationary processes.
What is needed now is a start toward debt retirement under a program of budgeted annual repayments, instead of a program of annual budget deficits that are added to the sum already owed. This Nation, unless it returns to financial responsibility, can destroy itself as it destroys the people's money. There is no reason, except political cowardice, for postponing such a program as Congressman ABC proposes.
Sounds just like a RAT.
I’m reading that it was removed last night. I don’t see where it was re-entered before today’s vote. Perhaps it will be included when it goes to the house?
no earmarks? Ironic that Rand’s old man was the king of earmarks.
Rand only thinks of himself, and how much camera time he can get. After referring Fauci twice already on criminal charges to the DOJ, Rand is going to waste more time and tax dollars on another hearing with Fauci, so he can refer him a third time.
It appears the removed provisions cannot be added to the bill after today’s vote. The house may propose amendments which will send it back to the senate
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.